Targets typically learn they are the target of a child sex crime investigation when a knock comes at the front door. A law enforcement officer and, sometimes, a department of human services (DHS) worker want to talk. They might try to sit down at the kitchen table or invite the target to a more controlled environment, where the interrogation room is wired for sound and video.
DHS workers may appear without law enforcement and typically do not give constitutionally required warnings given to defendants during a custodial interrogation. Such workers might reason they have no authority to take a target into custody and therefore have no duty to inform a suspect they have a right to remain silent and a right to an attorney.
Investigators use special interrogation techniques to urge the interrogation target to give "his side" of the story. They inform interrogation targets that they only have half the story and that this information will be one-sided when provided to the county attorney-- who will make a charging decision. Such officers will never explicitly state that confession equals leniency, they can and do come close. Targets should not fall for such techniques which are called "promissory leniency" and constitute a due process violation.
While police seek to extract a confession from the alleged sex offender, non governmental organizations called child advocacy centers, or, CACs, extract accusations from child witnesses. Their mission is outsourced police work and abdication of a duty to investigate the veracity and motives of potentially false claims. While CAC techniques are more sophisticated than a generation ago, critics still allege they fail to test the veracity of the statements nor assess the psychological composition of the accuser. The reason for this is simple; CACs and the workers who are drawn to this work believe they are wearing a white hat, that they are "saving the children." They cannot fathom that a child would lie. Indeed, they tout the proposition that on the whole children don't lie about child sex abuse. Indeed, the very existence of the CAC is a reaction to a bygone era of police work dismissive of child sex crimes. Now we have the opposite problem where no one will disbelieve them.
Though a forensic interviewer will never admit it, I suspect some among their ranks would consider some percentage of false accusations a small price to pay to prosecute every child sex abuse suspect.
If you or a loved one is the target of a child sex crime investigation, contact David A. Cmelik Law PLC for a free initial consultation today.
A lawyer on your side child sex crime investigators will line up quickly against the target of an investigation. While recent caselaw typically requires that law enforcement obtain a warrant to search cell phone contents, officers usually seek other methods to obtain the data they seek. For example, they may seek chats or website content claiming this information is not private. If you or a loved one has been identified as the target of a child sex charge investigation, the target owes it to himself to obtain legal counsel now.
Copyright David A. Cmelik Law PLC. All rights reserved.